this is stupid

Started by
23 comments, last by angry 20 years ago
Or just use D. I don''t know if it supports what you''re trying to do (somehow I doubt it). The real question is why do you need a virtual Init function when you can put the contents of the derived Init into a constructor?
--God has paid us the intolerable compliment of loving us, in the deepest, most tragic, most inexorable sense.- C.S. Lewis
Advertisement
All D would do is make it look prettier

The true general first seeks victory, then seeks battle
- Sun Tzu
quote:Original post by angry C++ isn''t a language, C++ is three languages(asm, C, C++).

This belief is why you aren''t using c++ well. Clear your mind of this, and everything else will be easier.
It makes perfectly good sense for the object to be an A before and during the construction of its A-ness.
char a[99999],*p=a;int main(int c,char**V){char*v=c>0?1[V]:(char*)V;if(c>=0)for(;*v&&93!=*v;){62==*v&&++p||60==*v&&--p||43==*v&&++*p||45==*v&&--*p||44==*v&&(*p=getchar())||46==*v&&putchar(*p)||91==*v&&(*p&&main(0,(char**)(--v+2))||(v=(char*)main(-1,(char**)++v)-1));++v;}else for(c=1;c;c+=(91==*v)-(93==*v),++v);return(int)v;}  /*** drpizza@battleaxe.net ***/
Yeah. Gee. C++ is hard. Ya''ll should just give up when things are hard.

On a serious note, I''ll agree that there are some brilliantly stupid things in C++, but this isn''t one of them.

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement